Abstract:BackgroundOutcomes for patients in UK with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA NSCLC) are amongst the worst in Europe. Assessing outcomes is important for analysing the effectiveness of current practice. However, data quality is inconsistent and regular large scale analysis is challenging.This project investigates the use of routine healthcare datasets to determine progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients treated with primary radical radiotherapy for LA NSCLC.MethodsAll… Show more
“…However, the method used mainly relied on procedures after primary treatments (radiation and chemotherapy). Other studies explored other data‐driven strategies for identifying recurrences in other cancers . For example, Earle et al developed an algorithm for identifying relapses of acute myelogenous leukemia, whereas Chubak et al developed one for detecting breast cancer recurrences.…”
Background: Second event (recurrence or second primary cancer)-free survival is an important indicator for assessing treatment efficacy. However, second events are not explicitly documented in administrative data such as cancer registries. Thus, validated algorithms using administrative data are needed to identify second events of oropharyngeal cancers. Methods: The algorithms were developed using classification and regression tree models. Data from chart review served as the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated. Results: The high-sensitivity algorithm achieved 87.9% (95% confidence interval: 82.2%-93.6%) sensitivity, 84.5% (81.1%-87.8%) specificity, 61.2% (54.1%-68.4%) PPV, 96.2% (94.2%-98.1%) NPV, and 85.2% (82.3%-88.1%) accuracy. The high-PPV algorithm obtained 52.4% (43.6%-61.2%) sensitivity, 99.1% (98.2%-100.0%) specificity, 94.2% (88.7%-99.7%) PPV, 88.2% (85.3%-91.0%) NPV, and 88.9% (86.3%-91.5%) accuracy. Conclusion: The validity of the algorithms for identifying second events following primary treatment of oropharyngeal cancers was acceptable.
K E Y W O R D Sadministrative data, case-finding algorithm, oropharyngeal cancer recurrence, population-based study, validation study
“…However, the method used mainly relied on procedures after primary treatments (radiation and chemotherapy). Other studies explored other data‐driven strategies for identifying recurrences in other cancers . For example, Earle et al developed an algorithm for identifying relapses of acute myelogenous leukemia, whereas Chubak et al developed one for detecting breast cancer recurrences.…”
Background: Second event (recurrence or second primary cancer)-free survival is an important indicator for assessing treatment efficacy. However, second events are not explicitly documented in administrative data such as cancer registries. Thus, validated algorithms using administrative data are needed to identify second events of oropharyngeal cancers. Methods: The algorithms were developed using classification and regression tree models. Data from chart review served as the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated. Results: The high-sensitivity algorithm achieved 87.9% (95% confidence interval: 82.2%-93.6%) sensitivity, 84.5% (81.1%-87.8%) specificity, 61.2% (54.1%-68.4%) PPV, 96.2% (94.2%-98.1%) NPV, and 85.2% (82.3%-88.1%) accuracy. The high-PPV algorithm obtained 52.4% (43.6%-61.2%) sensitivity, 99.1% (98.2%-100.0%) specificity, 94.2% (88.7%-99.7%) PPV, 88.2% (85.3%-91.0%) NPV, and 88.9% (86.3%-91.5%) accuracy. Conclusion: The validity of the algorithms for identifying second events following primary treatment of oropharyngeal cancers was acceptable.
K E Y W O R D Sadministrative data, case-finding algorithm, oropharyngeal cancer recurrence, population-based study, validation study
The generalized PSM analyses were able to retain 61.2% of patients, while the conventional PSM analyses were able to match from 24.1 to 77.1% of patients from each treatment comparison. The generalized PSM achieved statistical significance (p < 0.05) in 8/10 comparisons, whereas conventional pairwise PSM achieved 1/10. The noted differences arose from different matched patient samples and the size of the samples.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.